Hong Kong politics

Taking it to the streets

TENDING towards political apathy until the late 1980s, Hong Kong people have since fostered a fiesty tradition of taking to the streets to mark certain anniversaries. One of these is June 4th, the date of the 1989 crackdown against demonstrators in and around Beijing’s Tiananmen Square. Another is July 1st, the date in 1997 when China regained sovereignty over the former British colony

New Year’s Day has recently been added to the roster of protest dates on the Hong Kong activism calendar, and on January 1st thousands heeded the call. The Civil Human Rights Front, organisers of the march (pictured), said there were 30,000 participants; Hong Kong police gave a count of 11,100 demonstrators.

A year ago, tens of thousands people marched to demand that the city’s chief executive, Leung Chun-ying, step down. That was not to be, however, because in this city of 7.2 million, Mr Leung ultimately answers to a committee of 1,200 electors, including many Beijing appointees. This week’s New Year’s Day march was aimed at changing that political reality.

This year’s event also included an unofficial referendum, designed by one of the city’s leading pollsters, Robert Chung Ting-Yiu, of the University of Hong Kong. Majorities of more than 90% supported appeals to expand the election committee and to allow the public to nominate candidates in the next chief-executive election, scheduled for 2017. By then Hong Kong’s voters are due to be granted universal suffrage, according to a promise made by China in the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s mini-constitution.

Yet, China’s recent browbeating—in the form of suggestions that only “patriots” are fit to be candidates, and that all nominees must be screened— has rattled Hong Kong’s body politic. Demonstrators insisted that for universal suffrage to be meaningfully exercised, there must be more than a Hobson’s choice.

Political demands ranged from the radical (snubbing the Basic Law and scrapping the election committee) to the more pragmatic (pushing for an element of civil nomination). Plans for bringing more pressure to bear on authorities in China call for more civil disobedience events including an "Occupy" movement (its Chinese-language website is here) to disrupt the city’s financial heart, called Central.

On the night of January 1st in Central a subdued crowd of about 2,000, more inclined to clapping than to screaming slogans, worked on basic civil disobedience tradecraft. They practiced how to cushion their heads against blows and how to form a human chain in order to resist arrest. The crowd was diverse, made up of university students, retirees, bankers and low-income groups. But they were mainly united in the belief that an open popular election is the cure for many of the city’s social ills. Apathy, it seems, has gone out of style.

Taiwan was ruled by Japanese colonialism for some 50 years. Hong Kog was ruled by British colonialism even longer. While most Taiwanese and Hong Kongnese are proud and glad to have returned to China, there are those small cliques of slave trained die hards with unexposed vested interest and dark wish lurking to serve their former colonial master.

That’s why we have Taiwan Du (independence) and now so called Hong Kong Du. But they are no independence minded, they and their new recruits only know to tout working as slave for their former colonial master (in the name of ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ of course). They are to be pitied or despised.

PRC fears any threat to their regime and will do anything to try to prevent that happen - ranging from suppressing democracy in HK and self determination inside PRC or to provoke nationalistic feeling inside PRC or harassing neighbours as a distraction from underlying social issues internally.

Change is inevitable. I am happy PRC changed a lot and I couldn't imagine a Maoist China running HK. Now is time for the next step.

old soldiers of colonialism never die, they just faded away. so occasionally you'd still see a few remanent of them sneaking back to hong kong trying to stir up some fire of 'spring' to dethrone china's reemergence as a world power.

will they be successful someday? not if china is on guard and be tough with these trouble makers no matter what their boss and instigators behind the scene are trying to pin it on china.

For a year, the intermittent protest in Hong Kong shakes the root of Beijing’s “One China, two systems” basic structure. This time’s rally in Central helped the voice of revolt against peo-Beijing’s mechanism and policy, demanding the wholy-direct general election of Hong Kong’s 2017 chief executive, which National People’s Congress in Beijing has inclined to approve. Besides the Civil Human Rights Front, Hong Kong’s Democratic Party propagandize the “non-violence” planning like the means by Republic of India’s founder Mahatma Gandhi, in the meantime.

Last year for several times by Bloomberg and Financial Times’ report, the Chinese University of Hong Kong conducted polls of Leung Chun-ying’s support rate, once 49%, finding out that the rate is no less than 30%, a considerable variation of whether a leader in democratic nation may be forced to step down. At least, Mr. Leung does neither worse nor more pitiful than Taipei’s ever-10% low-support Chocolate Ma Ying-jeou. However, the activity’s route of anti-China approach will be no cancellation by 2017’s election. Moreover, it’s said that Taipei authority’s military intelligence unit sneaked a 50-year-old female espionage in this activity, according to Ta Kung Pao yesterday. It’s an evil intervention in Chinese affair that Taipei still makes me feel awkward and frustrated about the renegaded separation mind in hypocrisy when it comes to so-called “Ma-Xi Jin-ping” meeting. Rumor has it that American CIA and some congressmen, abetting some pan-Democartic members, would like to borrow some ideas, from no-humanity Lee Teng-hui’s “silent reform” in Taipei 20 years ago, that makes Beijing render aberrant on legitimacy or “Suzerainty” on Hong Kong since half a year ago (but Stephen M. Young, a former representative to Taipei’s Chen regime now in Hong Kong, denied the sayings on newspaper to me).

A disturbance involving a food-mouthing inlander and her children who disobeyed the Hong Kong’s law about environment in MRT 2 years ago resulted in a debating of ideology between civil rights and pro-China patriotism. Since then, the anger through Internet and comment on newspaper spreads, sometimes rendering Beijing fretful. Given 7.16m population in Hong Kong, 0.1m mass rally on demonstration has ability to press the authority and 0.5m might force the Beijing’s “appointee” to yield to the pan-democratic faction. As the last week's movement, there is a distance between the protestors’ demand and the present situation. Of course, it mustn’t be seen as a Mo Lei Tau’s “extracellular” sub-culture like the profile of Stephen Chew Sing-Chi, but a typical civil exercise in the Hong Kong history. Recently, it’s pessimistic to see no news or professional comment on iFeng.com, the most influential media that expands the attention to Hainan island, with a view to the opening political speech. And then, although People’s Liberation Army in Hong Kong’s camp takes no action to them, so “cute animal” for inland Chinese, the Hong Kong’s wide divergence of opinion on several issues should be settled down on a chance of the potentially-incoming rally bringing a sense of frustration at Beijing’s political arrangement.

The potential one competent to achieve the victory in 2017’s election is Albert Cheng Jing-han, a arguable radio anchorman like Cheng Hung-yi in Taiwan who should have been nominated as then China’s prime minister Zhu Rong-ji’s first chief executive in Taiwan (sarcastically on public image, Cheng hated by Foxconn’s Terry Guo Tai-min is close to Chen Shui-bian’s mini-court regime). The general election seems to hardly happen and nevertheless just one weak opposition has a willing to challenge the incumbent one, rather than Alan Leong Kah-kit in 2007’s election. However, there is no sufficient reason to support the contention that Hong Kong’s democracy declines too much so that Wuer Kaixi, the main participant in Tienanmen Incident, fleed to Hong Kong for turning himself in once 2 months ago (but the procedure is no accordance to Beijing’s lawsuit). Well, the world-class metropolitan living surroundings needs the mutual patience and confidence of protection. Therefore, there is a bigger expectation on Hong Kong’s entertainer like Dada Chan, the Top 100 Beauty in the world, or Chrissie Chau Sau-Na incoming Lunar New Year and the following days without too nerve on any potential turmoil.

One motivation for the rulers of the PRC would seem to be this. Hong Kong provided an example for the move of China towards a more capitalistic economic model. If Hong Kong is allowed to move towards popular nomination and election of its rulers, the PRC's population might reasonably expect to see steps in that direction for the whole country. Which would be a serious threat to the Communist Party's control.

That was what happened in 1989, when Hong Kong public backed protests inside China. PRC rulers genuinely fear HK influence in Mainland.

I do think HK people should speak out more in case the 2017 promise is not met.

A strategy PRC has employed now is economics. All Chinese neighbours (ASEAN, Japan, Taiwan) or potentially subversive regions (HK, Tibet) are now so dependent with the trade with China or investment that it is hard to gain a lot of political leverage against PRC. In the end, the big stick does the talking, but suspicion, displeasure, and anger against PRC influence is clearly there. Many HK business leader genuinely fear PRC as much as they know how corrupt PRC government is.

The PRC will do as Cuba if necessary so all those who don´t accept the PRC system will leave. Probably, many of them (and usually among the most skilled) will go to Australia to help create a "Southern Hong Kong" in Townsville or Darwin...

Hong kong does have universal suffrage, just as China has universal suffrage but as with Europe and the US these are indirect elections. Electors are chosen, and as with parliament those MPs choose their leader.

The Hong Kong system is slightly different, in addition to the Legislative council which is chosen by popular vote the Chief Executive is chosen by with a combination of distributed electoral votes.

This might seem odd, but its no stranger than how each US state divides up its electoral votes.

My right to life is yours as well
Our right is to live joyously in harmony
with Nature and the universe.
We also have the right, as children, women and men
to learn all about it and to fully explore it
as much as we can.
And to marry and have children
who can grow free in the world as much as they are able.
Sharing the wealth of our world without
loss due to greed, threats, bullying and selfishness.
Sharing shelter, food and water.
When we are ill in body or spirit, we need full, free treatment
to quickly bring us back to health.

It's pretty absurd to suggest that the British government is manipulating protests in Hong Kong. Since the 1960s they've consistently shown that they don't want immigrants from Hong Kong. They even changed the law in 1981, before negotiating handover, to make it harder to immigrate.

Immigrant phobia in the UK is currently reaching fever pitch. So why would the British government incite unrest in Hong Kong? It would only increase the likelihood of a flood of refugees arriving some day.